Yoder II? (fwd)

[Beth Young]

The language of H.R. 4257 is appended below.  When I originally saw this bill,
it specifically mentioned "Amish" children--the language has been changed
since then.

What I don't understand is the need for any religious exemption.  If there are
enough safeguards in this bill to protect children who are members "of a
religious sect or division thereof whose established teachings do not permit
formal education beyond the eighth grade," there should be enough
safeguards to protect all children.  So why not let all children benefit
from the opportunity to perform "certain work with wood products"?

And if there are not sufficient safeguards in this bill to protect all
children, why are we giving less protection to Amish children?  Are Amish
children somehow less valuable to the country?  Or are Amish parents somehow
better than other American parents, and more likely to protect their kids?

Beth Young
U of Central Florida, Orlando
byoung at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu


To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit certain youth to
perform certain work with wood products. (Introduced in the House)
HR 4257 IH
105th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 4257
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit certain youth to
perform certain work with wood products.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 16, 1998
Mr. PITTS (for himself, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. GOODLING, Mr. PETERSON of
Pennsylvania, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. MCINTOSH, Mr. GEKAS, Mr. COBURN, and Mr. ENGLISH
of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit certain youth to
perform certain work with wood products.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXEMPTION.
Section 13(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(c)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
`(6)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), in the administration and enforcement of
the child labor provisions of this Act, it shall not be considered oppressive
child labor for an individual who--
`(i) is under the age of 18 and over the age of 14, and
`(ii) is a member of a religious sect or division thereof whose established
teachings do not permit formal education beyond the eighth grade,
to be employed inside or outside places of business where machinery is used to
process wood products.
`(B) The employment of an individual under subparagraph (A) shall be
permitted--
`(i) if there is an adult present in a supervisory capacity; and
`(ii) if the individual does not operate or assist in the operation of
power-driven woodworking machines.'.







At 02:28 PM 10/7/98 -0700, Eric Treene wrote:
>>
>
>Reading my earlier post, a colleague pointed out to me that we don't know the
>language of the statute, and that it is possible that it names the Amish or
>defines the class of religious people that could benefit so narrowly as to
>exclude everybody  except the Amish ( I cannot tell whether the quote in the
>story are from the statute itself or is a statement by the Congressman
>regarding its purpose).  If so, that would of course make the Establishment
>Clause issues more complicated.
>
>Eric Treene
>The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
>
>
>> Eric Treene
>> The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
>
~~~~~~~
Dr. Beth Rapp Young                             office: 407-823-2853
Assistant Professor, English                    fax: 407-823-3007
Director, University Writing Center             home: 407-207-1453
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~byoung
byoung at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/religionlaw/attachments/19981008/62db4936/attachment.htm